Motion to Compel – Page 136 – Electronic Discovery Law

Momah v. Albert Einstein Med. Center, 164 F.R.D. 412 (E.D. Pa. 1996)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Plaintiff’s motion to compel copy of “list files” screen, which listed each document created by name or number, as well as the size of the document, the date on which it was created and the date on which it was last edited, granted where plaintiff demonstrated need to determine whether key documents were back-dated

Nature of Case: Wrongful termination (discrimination based on race/national origin)

Electronic Data Involved: Copy of “list files” screen showing details of files on computer of individual defendant

Murlas Living Trust v. Mobil Oil Corp., 1995 WL 124186 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 20, 1999)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Defendant not required to produce entire database; defendant ordered to re-search database for information relevant to subject property and if further information found, to produce it

Nature of Case: Lessor sued for contract breach and related claims stemming from leaking underground storage tank

Electronic Data Involved: Database containing information re facilities with leaking underground storage tanks

Nicholas v. Windham Int’l, Inc., 373 F.3d 537 (4th Cir. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion to deny enforcement of subpoena directed to plaintiffs’ nonparty company where defendants had already deposed plaintiffs and conceded that the company would have no additional information, plaintiffs would be designated Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses if discovery were allowed, and plaintiffs had already produced email from their business accounts and remained under a continuing obligation to supplement their earlier productions

Nature of Case: Ancillary proceeding to enforce subpoena

Electronic Data Involved: Email

OpenTV v. Liberate Tech., 219 F.R.D. 474 (N.D. Cal. 2003)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Applying Zubulake balancing test, court ordered parties to share equally the cost of extracting source code from defendant’s database; however, defendant solely to bear cost of copying source code for production once it is extracted

Nature of Case: Infringement action

Electronic Data Involved: Source code

Oved & Assocs. Const. Servs., Inc. v. Superior Court, 2003 WL 23028903 (Cal. App. Dec. 30, 2003) (Unpublished)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Petition for writ of mandate denied; based on evidence that a business computer was used for accounting and nothing else, and that there was a risk the hard drive might be purged, trial court acted properly when it ordered the petitioner to produce the computer’s hard drive

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of funds

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drive

Portis v. City of Chicago, 2004 WL 1535854 (N.D. Ill. July 7, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court granted motion to compel access to database constituting fact work product, where requesting party demonstrated (1) substantial need for the information and (2) undue hardship were it required to compile a similar database from scratch; however, requesting party would have to contribute its fair share toward the expenses incurred in compiling the database

Nature of Case: Class action for civil rights violations

Electronic Data Involved: Database compiled at direction of plaintiffs’ attorneys

Portis v. City of Chicago, 2004 WL 2812084 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 7, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court clarified its July 7, 2004 order and explained how it intended the costs of compiling the database would be calculated: the number of hours plaintiffs’ computer expert and the paralegals spent on the project, multiplied by their respective hourly billing rates, plus other costs, if any; court quashed defendants’ discovery requests seeking information regarding the salaries paid to computer expert and the paralegals

Nature of Case: Class action for civil rights violations

Electronic Data Involved: Database compiled at direction of plaintiffs’ attorneys

Positive Software Solutions, Inc. v. New Century Mortgage Corp., 259 F. Supp. 2d 561 (N.D. Tex. 2003)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court entered preservation order requiring preservation of all extant backups or images of all servers or personal computers containing disputed software or email; court denied motion to compel imaging of all media potentially containing software or electronic evidence relevant to the claims in the suit, and all images of defendants’ computer storage facilities, drives and servers taken to date, as substantially overbroad

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Backups and images of servers, software and email

Promega Corp. v. Applera Corp., 2002 WL 32340886 (W.D. Wis. Nov. 27, 2002)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: After plaintiffs objected to production of sales database because it was not organized to its liking, and defendants produced two further iterations in an attempt to respond to plaintiffs’ complaints, court denied plaintiff’s motion to compel production of “complete and accurate” database since court “was not convinced that defendants have failed to produce this information, even if it is not in the ideal format plaintiff desires”

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Sales database

Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG, 222 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Based on in camera review, court granted defendant’s motion to compel based on the crime/fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege, ordered production of other documents on same subject matter and further ruled that discovery would be allowed regarding documents produced and on the issue of sanctions

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Email, backup tapes

Tag:Motion to Compel